Trump Taxes Fallout

Oh boy. So the left got their way, sort of, and Trump's "taxes" were released. And it's blown up on them. Here are my thoughts on the issue.

(1) The left, the anti-Trump right and the establishment have been pushing hard to make Trump release his taxes. They've been obsessed with it. The left hoped to prove he paid no taxes, something Hillary claimed several times. The establishment wanted to keep the requirement alive because they obsess about procedures. The anti-Trumps hoped to prove he wasn't a billionaire. None got their wish.

(2) The left has been foaming about the tax returns before and since the election. They thought the issue would resonate and would weaken Trump. Some even called it an impeachable offense. The problem is the public really didn't care. The reaction since the release not only wiped out their hysterical claim about taxes, but it revealed that few do care.

(3) The tax returns themselves are from 2005 and show about $150 million in income with $38 million paid. This countered everything the left claimed in their paranoia. It shows that he did pay taxes -- at higher rates than any Democrat (e.g. Obama, Clinton). He showed that he was likely a billionaire too, based on the income. There was nothing suspicious in them either. Wa wa wa wahhhh!!

(4) Rachel Maddow is the one who produced the tax returns. She immediately found herself on the defensive for basically breaking the law to get his taxes. Trump has now called it "fake news," which resonates given that nothing the left claimed would be there has been found. As a result of this, the tax returns wiped the anti-Trumpcare headlines from the front pages. Some places, like CNBC are attacking MSNBC over this. Ha ha.

(5) There are now suggestions that Trump leaked the taxes himself, which would be hilarious. Probably true. Personally, I also think Trump cherry-picked his best year to leak, and there's probably "better" stuff in other years that weren't released, but now the chance to force him to release those is blown politically. So rounding this up, Maddow made herself look like a criminal to satisfy a leftist obsession. In so doing, she seems to have utterly diffused the issue and proven the left obsessed and Trump right, all while wiping bad GOP press off the headlines. That's kind of funny. Basically, I think Trump used Maddow. LOL!

------

As an unrelated aside, we had an interesting incident yesterday. Apparently, at the middle school my daughters attend, one sixth grade boy got dumped in a garbage can by another. As he got dumped, he punched the boy who did it and loosened a tooth. Sounds like a pretty good fight. What were they fighting over? My sixth grade daughter. Arg. Dad mode engaged.... time to buy a gun and a shovel.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

UPDATE: Shia LeBeouf and other stuff

A few weeks ago I reported that poor dear Hollywood actor Shia LeBeouf has become so unhinged since Trump was elected that he talked the Museum of the Moving Image in Queens, NYC to allow him to set up a political protest performance aahht installation called "He Will Not Divide Us", which was comprised of a 24/7 video feed available for anyone to shout "HE WILL NOT DIVIDE US! over and over. As you may remember, it didn't go well so he had to move it to New Mexico [UPDATED from Arizona]. Well that didn't go well either, so he moved it to some "undisclosed location". The live video feed only showed his big black and white flag hailing "HE WILL NOT DIVIDE US!" waving in the wind and bit of sky so no one could find it and ruin his masterpiece of protest.

Okay, so apparently there are lots of people who just don't have enough to do, so they went on what is the best "Capture The Flag" adventure ever! This is the funniest thing I have seen lately.

Trolls, 1. Shia LaBeouf, 0. pic.twitter.com/JHm44ZobYv

— Page Six (@PageSix) March 10, 2017

Now some "stuff":
My brand of "feminism" is more "Lysistrata" and less "Playboy". So, what is wrong with young actress these day who think they are empowering themselves and other women by getting naked or nearly naked? And when called on it, they get offended when it is pointed out that maybe getting naked or nearly naked is (sorry, guys) exactly what men have always wanted women to do! How being fooled by the "evil patriarchy" is that? "Yey! Naked Boobs! We WIN AGAIN!".

So "bless her heart"*, Emma Watson of Harry Potter fame who is opening Friday in yet another version of "Beauty And The Beast" the fairytale to Disney cartoon to Disney live-action Broadway Musical to Disney live-action movie musical (with the extra hook of a gay character...who cares). So as part of the publicity blitz, Ms. Watson, a vocal womyn's rights activist, did a spread for Vanity Fair magazine where she appears all but topless. To her great surprise and confusion, "Feminists" criticized her for objectifying women by getting nearly naked! I understand her confusion. As she explains when criticized:

“Feminism is about giving women choice. Feminism is not a stick with which to beat other women with. It’s about freedom, it’s about liberation, it’s about equality. I really don’t know what my tits have to do with it. It’s very confusing."

I understand her confusion. Yes, it is about "choice". It has always been about "choice". But the "choice" that women have been fighting for is to be taken seriously for their minds and capabilities and not the sum total of their body parts. The whole "body parts" thing is, to quote a line from "Beauty And The Beast, "a tale as old as time".

The floor is open.

*Just for the record, when a Southern women use "Bless your heart", we mean something entirely different.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Snicker snicker

"The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers." - Princess Leah.

One of the things that always gives me hope about the human race is that all current "powers-that-be" try to control the public, yet there are always people ready to mock their ideology and expose their failures, and the "powers-that-be" are helpless before them. This is why I have to laugh really hard about the following crude picture.

The statue you see is called the "Fearless Girl"... a symbol of supposed feminine empowerment. She's fearless in the sense that loser woman self-identify as "strong women." Basically, she's an expression of a false reality with the hope that if we all just say that something is true then it will be true. But as the picture has exposed, this is a pipe dream. Let me offer some thoughts:

1. First, the idea of this statue is that women are empowered as seen by the girl not being afraid of the charging Wall Street bull statue. You go girl! But hold on. The bull represents bull markets... i.e. good economic times. Indeed, a bull market is a good thing. It represents economic expansion, jobs for all, money to go around for everyone. The goal of every ideology from communism to capitalism is as many bull markets as they can get. So why would anyone be afraid of that? Did feminists not realize that? This "Fearless Girl" statue is as stupid as putting up a statue declaring that you won't be intimidated by charity or hope. Morons.

2. Ok. So the very idea behind the statue exposes the utter lack of knowledge of the chickies claiming empowerment. Next question: why a girl? Aren't we told that women should be viewed as the equivalent of men, and that even calling them "girls" infantilizes them and is derogatory? Yet, here we have a little girl representing the women of Wall Street, and she's even called "Fearless Girl." Did no one think of the signal this sent?

3. Third, so now we have the women of Wall Street infantalized to little girls who aren't terrified of good times (you go girl!) and along comes some nameless, probably drunk guy who mocks their statue... and the world of empowered women has a meltdown and thereby proves that they are not fearless or capable of handling the rough and tumble real world. Pathetic. He mocked their monument to their claimed strength, and millions of women broke down into impotence exposing the lie of their empowerment. Even the chickie who took the photo and rushed out to whine about it comes across as pathetic beyond pathetic:

"There were people there talking about empowering children and women and for then to have this 20-something showing his entitlement, defiling the statute... it was utterly revolting."

OMG, did he wave his "entitlement" in your face? How long was it?

Seriously, when you don't know the difference between good and bad things, when you claim to be empowered and then pick everything you claim is an insult as your symbol, and when you have an emotional breakdown at the first person to mock your cause, you shouldn't really consider yourself "empowered." That's more like "sheltered," snowflake.

So kudos to The Revolter for making a mockery of this crap with his mighty entitlement.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Today's Article

Sorry for the delayed post. Without women around, I didn’t know how to write an article or post it. Here are some thoughts:

● So the Womyn’s March is today and unless you know to look for it, there’s no evidence of it. You know, the danger with withholding your services is that people often find out how little you actually add to the equation. Careful, losers.

● I find it interesting that the two things the left remains obsessed with Trump over are his tax returns and his ties to Russia, neither of which matter to anyone. So much for him creating rape America... rounding up gays... reinstituting slavery... you get the picture. The other thing the left/media is doing now is writing these theoretical articles that are ridiculous. Today’s warned us that “The Air Could Become More Smoggy Under Trump!” The other day it was “What will happen if health insurance becomes unaffordable?!” Uh, when did it become affordable? Basically, they are going issue by issue and speculating that everything could get worse. What a joke.

● With Obama seemingly fleeing from his return to politics, Hillary of all people is now talking about returning. This says a lot about the lack of talent the Democrats have. But seriously, who else is there right now? Jerry Brown? Joe Biden? Pelosi? The Ghost of Tip O'Neal?

● So apparently, Ivanka Trump’s fashion line has reported record sales, increasing 346%. That’s hilarious! So much for the power of the left to boycott. Shame on you Nordstroms. Starbucks, meanwhile, has lost sales since thumbing its nose at Trump over the travel ban.

● Unemployment has fallen to 4.7%. Let’s see if Trump can do what Obama could not do... but every other President could... and get it to 3%!

● Did you notice that Trump re-issued the Horribly Racist Anti-Muslim Executive Order... and no one really seemed to care this time? So what does that make the outrage the first time? Oh yeah... fake.

● The Democrats are trying to copy the GOP’s structure now, which I find interesting. First, wasn’t the GOP this evil chaotic thing always on the verge of civil war? Doesn't that make copying it a bit like recreating the government of Liberia? Even more to the point, the GOP structure has really not been successful. The GOP is a mess. The only things keeping them afloat are (1) their ideology appeals at the state level, (2) gerrymandering in the House, and (3) the unpalatability of the Democrats nationally.

● Finally, back on this Coffee Klatch Day thing. I’m already seeing several article on the left that worry this will backfire. They note that striking is very unpopular in the US and this is a strike. They noted that schools closed in the DC/NoVA/MD area and this is will piss off parents. They worry that nurses might not show up or airlines could be grounded if women don’t show up, all of which “will cause chaos” -- actually, it will cause chaos for a small, but very angry high-profile group of people. They worry that no one really knows why they are doing this either, and that makes the whole thing kind of a farce.

Those are good points. I think the bigger problem is this... to be blunt... these women are whining. They are whining that they don’t like their jobs and want more than they are getting. They are whining that their first world lives aren’t fulfilling and that people don’t shower them with respect and attention. And they are taking the day off to whine about it. Those are bad optics. It’s selfish. It’s entitled. It’s out of touch.

It's also a mistake. It will highlight just how little these people actually matter when life doesn't stop or turn to chaos. When people realize, huh, that missing chick didn't really keep our office going, did she?... or they start to ask questions like, why is my kid's teacher out playing around when they schools suck of badly?... that's when people change their minds about your worth, and not in a good way.

In fact, there is no possibility of positive momentum from this. Their numbers will be much smaller than before, so it will feel like a fading movement. Their demands have gotten less clear if anything, so they will feel like a movement devolving. And look for the enduring publicity to be a series of articles about womyn who got fired for attending, making it seem like society had issued its verdict. If you're going to do a show of power... you better have some to show.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

How To Prepare For "A Day Without Women" -

Be afraid. Be very afraid. Wednesday, March 8 is the official "A Day Without Women" General Strike in conjunction with the International Women's Day. All of the women of the world who have nothing better to do, will stop doing whatever it is that they do, to not do what they would be doing (or something like that). The DC schools have announced that they will be closing, so the teachers can strike. No word yet about what our female elected officials in Congress will be doing or not doing.

I have read much of the website and it is full of lots of soaring rhetoric about saving the women from the evils of the world. But other than staging a general strike, there really is no list of solid, workable solutions or policies to present. But there is a very clear list of what your womenfolk will and won't be doing...

Copied from the website [I added my own commentary]:

- Women to refrain from paid and unpaid work.
[Unless you do not have the option, then you can go to work, but complain all day about how bad you have it]

- We ask all people to refrain from shopping in stores or online. Exceptions include local small businesses and women-owned businesses that support us. (#GrabYourWallet has a list of corporations we do not support throughout the year.)
[Really, "shopping"? Isn't it kind of sexist to assume women can't go a day without shopping? Also, that GrabYOurWallet "list" is not a list to boycott businesses that treat women badly. It is an exclusive "boycott business related to Trump" list. Hypocritically, many on the list are Ivanka Trump-related...a woman. Therefore, not all women should be supported.]

- Wear red in solidarity with the strike.
[Red will work nicely with that pink hat that they knitted for the Million Women March in January. Just 'cause a woman is striking, doesn't mean her colors should clash!]

- We ask that our male allies lean into care giving on March 8th, and use the day to call out decision-makers at the workplace and in the government to extend equal pay and adequate paid family leave for women.
[Yeah...do something!]

You poor, incompetant men who do nothing and otherwise cannot live without women doing your bidding all day long will just have to suck it up and spend your money all on your own. So what will you need to do to survive?

I am really worried that this is going to devolve into something catastrophic like that Y2K fiasco! Remember when the planes fell out of the sky? No? Well, it could've happened. So just to be on the safe side, let's make a "Honey Do" list for you guys. I will start you off:

1. Wake yourself up!
2. If something falls on the floor, pick it up. This includes yourself.
3. Eat something from that big cold metal box in the food area of your dwelling. WARNING: Do not eat from anything with a picture of a skull and crossbones or a rat on it, or anything that looks weird or fuzzy. You could die! Oh, and just eat over the sink because there will be no woman around to wash that plate for you.
4. Call your boss who is obviously a man and tell him you can't come to work because you don't have a woman around to tell you how.
5. Go back to bed because you can't figure out how to dress yourself.

Okay, what will you be doing to prepare...


Disclaimer: Let me be clear before the real feminists take away my "Woman" card. I am not opposed to women standing up for their rights at all and taking to the streets in solidarity. Women need to stand up for themselves. We are vital to humanity. And some men need to show their appreciation better. But that's not what this "Day" is about. It's just another organized "Rail Against Trump" day.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Good Luck With That

Rumor has it Obama wants to get back into the political game. According to the left: "OMG! Obama is coming back! Obama is coming back to politics! He's so smart and sexy and he's going to fight for me! Now he'll free us from this troublesome Trump!" Said differently, they say that since their savor "earned" $60 million in a book deal (read: payolla), Obama is now (read: still) rich and no longer needs to worry about anything, so his goal is to force Trump to resign or to be impeached before his term is up. The problem is, this is a horrible idea. Here's why:

(1) A country can only have one ruler, and Americans in particular expect Presidents to leave office and age gracefully. They don't want them staying in politics. Violate this rule at your peril.

(2) In fact, only two violated this to a degree in recent history. Jimmy Carter took shots from the sidelines and tried to interfere with foreign policy. He was basically ignored or treated as a joke. Bill Clinton took forays into politics to help his wife, and tarnished the hell out of his image. He was smeared as a racist in 2008 and he was smeared as a fool by his wife's campaign in 2008 and 2012. Now he's gone from "two-time winner" to "hurdle that helped his wife become a two-time loser." Obama seems much more likely to fall into the Clinton example. Why? Read on...

(3) Bill Clinton was never a great politician. He won the White House in plurality votes (never coming near 50%) because H. Ross Perot was determined to destroy Bush and then thought he might win against an unpopular Clinton and the terrible Bob Dole. Clinton did win, true, but he also managed to end a near Century of Democratic control over the House and only slightly less control over the Senate. He lost the South finally for the Democrats and he failed to keep the Democrats from drifting into the land of Identity Politics, which have doomed them now (that was actually his goal coming to power). In short, winning was the only thing he did right and he only did that because other people beat his opponents.

Nevertheless, Clinton was celebrated by the MSM-left as a genius because the left wanted him to be a genius. His friends in Hollywood made movies about him and gave him celebrity status everywhere. The MSM hired away all of his staffers and filled their ranks with his supporters, who then talked about his communication genius and his brilliant ability to reach the public. In other words, they invented a myth. Suddenly, his two victories were triumphs rather than squeakers. In fact, consider this. The genius, at the height of his popularity, couldn't help Al Gore beat an unqualified ex-drunken moron. His failure was excused as being about a stolen election and wooden candidate, but Bill failed to deliver. Then 2008 and 2012 exposed just how bad a politician he really was. Not only could he not reach a skeptical public, but his own supporters were embarrassed by him.

Enter Obama.

The media had a crush on Obama. He was the perfect black man of their dreams... "clean", progressive but sounded like he could appeal to middle America, "no negro dialect", educated, OMG's he's amazing! Consequently, they decided he was an amazing candidate too. Then he beat the mental-case version of Yosemite Sam and Reality-Trash Palin, and the left knew he was genius! In fact, he's the greatest politician of all time! He even won re-election against the Mitt 'Bologna Sandwich' Romney to prove it. He's dreamy! makes googly eyes and sighs wistfully

Um no. Obama relied on his opponents falling apart and offered one selling point: "I will tell black America to stop being a bunch of race-obsessed whiners." That's it. Oh, and he read well from the teleprompter. He lacked Clinton's ability to reach normal voters. He lacked Clinton's ear for the issues that mattered. He lacked Clinton's desire to do something worthwhile.

All of this became increasingly obvious as his failures piled up. He did nothing to build a consensus that would let him lead. He couldn't even build a consensus with his own party. He failed to support the Democrats and took them from the point of absolute power in the US to their worst position since the start of the 1900's. He was never able to work with any foreign leaders, to sway the public on any issue, to identify issues that mattered, to control the public agenda, to pass laws, to pass regulations, or to put his ideas into play in any way. He lost millions of votes in his re-election bid (something that's never happened before). He wasn't even able to help make his own voters turn out to either keep Hillary from winning the primaries or help her win the general election.

Like "Bill Clinton, Brilliant Politician and Most Popular Man Ever," Obama as a brilliant politician is a myth. Objectively, the man is a total failure, whose only skill was that the GOP ran two awful candidates against him. Getting back into politics will only prove this as Obama lacks the wit, drive and interest in politics to deal with Trump, who will not bend over and let Obama kick him. Moreover...

(4) Obama will be shocked by how little support he will have. The most fundamental problem Obama faces is that he will stand in the way of the other Democrats. Right now, the Democrats are in a civil war to decide how to re-allign themselves in a post Obama world. Who will lead them, who will control the voice and wallet of the party, etc. Obama sticking his nose back in will crowd out those who are fighting for these spots. He will not be welcome. And since he brings nothing to the table except memories of an unpopular presidency, look for this to go wrong fast.

So hey, bring him on! Unfortunately, if Obama has proven one thing over time, it is that he is lazy. I don't see him bothering.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

PSA - March4Trump

This is a public service announcement for those of you who may be interested: March 4 Trump on Saturday, March 4 in DC and around the country - Local Marches.

With all of the other marches, rallies, and riots being staged against Trump since the election, it will be interesting to see how well these are attended. It seems a little last minute, but maybe that is a wise choice considering the anarchists have been ready to cause trouble when there's a lot of pre-planning. I am not advocating one way or another about attending, but just giving out information.

Anyway, the floor is open for whatever discussions or topics you may want to start.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Left Is Falling Apart

There's an article you should all check out: Resistance Report: As Trump Wins Praise, Activists Try Not To Get Discouraged. This thing is mucho fascinating for a number of reasons.

This article is written by a leftist for Yahoo and it's basically an attempt to cheerlead the left to keep them from collapsing in light of everything going wrong for them. The problem is that it's ridiculous. Here are my thoughts.

● My first thought is that this article confirms what I'm seeing: the left has fallen apart. For all their anger and marches and vague ideas of what they wanted at first, reality has sunk in they aren't realizing they won't get the instant gratification they wanted. So they're quitting. Compare this with the Tea Party people who were busy organizing and plotting at this point as the establishment mocked them and wrote them off.

● The article says this:

“They have the House. They have the Senate. The [sic] have state legislatures. They have the governorships. They have Fox News. They have Russian hackers. They have the Oval Office,” he said. “Not for long!” someone in the crowd cried out. He continued: “But not for long! Because we have three things that make all those things seem this small. We have the truth. We have the Constitution. And we have the large majority of the American people.”

Wow. First, when the public gives your enemies every lever of power at the state and federal level, that's not insignificant. That means something about you. Secondly, when did Fox News become the only news source? Wouldn't having CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, the BBC, all the newspapers, Hollywood, almost all magazines and all colleges outweigh Fox News? Third, the left wouldn't know the truth if it hit them in the ass. They don't care about the Constitution either -- in fact, they've been openly trying to violate it. Finally, the idea they have a large majority of the American people is laughable. Any voter gap is less than 1/3 of 1%.

● Later in the article, they look for solace in the idea that the ratings for Trump's speech were lower than Obama's. I can't imagine a more pathetic basis to conclude that the public is with you... "Gee, not as many people watched him as did Obama's first speech! We're winners!"

● Then they looked for solace in two elections. They lost in a Connecticut state Senate race 56-44. But hey, this 12% loss is the best they've done there in a long time. Really? Or how's this, a Democrat in Minnesota lost by only 500 votes in a Republican district in a state house race. I would be embarrassed even to mention these. Two blue states. Following an overkill Republican sweep. Supposedly energized liberals. And they score two loses, one a blowout, and yet these are supposed to shoe growing Democratic strength? Ha!

● Then they crow that leftists annoyed Marco Rubio's landlord and got his month-to-month lease terminated. Gee. That's going to shift the balance... of something. Next they might order pizzas to his house! Take that fascist pig!

● Finally, it's interesting to me that there seems to be no actually purpose here. Try as I might, all I can find as a reason for the Trump Resistance is to resist Trump. There's nothing that specifically bothers them except the man himself. Basically, they didn't like losing and that's all this is about... a tantrum.

Even beyond this, consider the following.

● The Oscars are the heart of the anti-Trump movement: Hollywood. They were political. They were nasty. They were smug. They bragged about being able to bait Trump. Yet, Trump blew them off and acted presidential. Even worse, at the same time, the Oscars came to look like a clusterfudge. They invited a guest to show how "every man" Hollywood really is and he went viral... until it came out he's a convicted rapist. Meryl Streep feuded with a fashion designer. They couldn't get the biggest award of the night right, and they're still pointing fingers over this. Part of the stage even collapsed.

● Then Trump gave his speech. A handful of Democrats showed up in white, covered in pins and ribbons, to show their support for anything they could think of. The problem was the white was hardly universal and it made them look like a tiny minority even within the Democrats. Then when Trump praised the dead navy Seal, a moment Obama agitator Van Jones said "made him President," the Democrats acted rudely... insulting her. They then went out and whined about the widow being a prop. Sour grapes galore. What's more, the speech was inclusive, widely popular (some polls say 70%+) and yet the Democrats are trying to sell it as "out of touch," even as their own people say they liked it. So who's out of touch?

● With nothing else to smear, the left is again going after Melina and Ivanka. Specifically, they are attacking their clothes and style. This is both catty and nasty, and comes across that way. And is that really what political movements are based on.. catty sniping at the First Lady?

Things just aren't going well for the left. I predicted that they would run out of steam by June, but it looks like it's happening a couple months early.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

More liberals...

This was one of those weekends where liberals kept making fools of themselves. Here is some of the stupidity.

● One of the latest liberal talking points is that Trump is being hypocritical by calling for states’ rights in the transgender bathroom issue, but arguing that marijuana needs to be controlled at the federal level. Keep in mind that hypocrisy means nothing to the left, so arguing that someone else is wrong for being hypocritical is... well, hypocritical.

More to the point though, this really shows that liberals are incapable of using rational judgment. Why would one of these be federal and the other state regulated? Well, consider this. Marijuana is bought, sold and shipped across state lines. When Colorado legalized, half the stuff sold here went to people who drove it to other states. It's effects cross state borders. When a tranny enters a bathroom, they don’t suddenly materialize in bathrooms in other states. That’s the obvious difference. Even an idiot can see that. But idiot > liberal.

● When the issue of the White House Correspondent’s Dinner (WHCD) first came up, several media groups said they wouldn’t participate. Liberals said, “Yeah, boycott! Show that evil Trump that you won’t stand him!” Then Trump said he wasn’t going to attend because he's boycotting the biased media. The left immediately attacked: “What a loser for Trump not to show up! It affects free speech when he doesn't show up!” See a problem with this? Liberals don't.

● I am amazed how many liberal sites have devolved to just posting comments by random people on Twitter that slam Trump. “Wait til u see this cutting comment posted by some guy!” Oh, burrrrrrrn. As I said, Marx and Lenin must be spinning in their graves. “All we need is love!” “Love Trumps hate!” Good luck with that.

● So the Democrats chose Tom Perez as the new DNC Chairman. I guess he had the right skin tone. Anyways, he promised to “rebuild at all levels from ‘school board to the Senate’ and reach out to chunks of rural America left feeling forgotten in the 2016 election.” Interesting, since the Democrats don’t admit they left anyone behind in rural-f*ckistan... damn white people STFU!! Sorry, I was channeling the Democratic Party there for a moment.

Anyways, Perez is an Obama insider, which shows that Bernie’s people will not win control over the Party. It also shows that Hillary isn’t calling the shots anymore. Either way though, Perez steps into an impossible job. How do you motivate a party motivated only by personal hate while simultaneously attracting the people you are hating? Good luck.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Wrong Narratives

Just a couple thoughts tonight on the games the liberal MSM is playing.

● Projecting: When you take your own feelings and use those as a basis to explain the motivations of other, that is called projection. The best example is how psychologists with mommy issues will assume that all their patients are suffering from mommy issues. Liberals have been doing this for years, projecting their own racism, sexism, hate, spite and bad faith onto conservatives. Now the media has transformed this issue into a real world thing. They are doing this thusly:

Step One: Liberals accuse Trump cabinet choice of being divisive.
Step Two: Liberals riot against cabinet choice.
Step Three: The Media uses fact of riot as evidence of divisiveness.

Logic calls this a tautology. Psychologists call it projection. The left doesn't see anything wrong with it.

● Do NOTHING!: The left is attacking Trump for doing nothing... as if they want him to be active. The problem with this is that almost every day brings some new policy change that either undoes the last eight years of Obama in one pen stroke or makes a substantive change to US policy. You see how stupid that reasoning is.

Anyways, to support it, they are trying to whine that so far Trump hasn't had an Obamacare or whatever-else-Obama-actually-did-in-office-I'm-sure-there-had-to-be-something. They forget that Obamacare didn't happen until two years into Obama's administration. Dodd-Frank didn't happen for another year. And nothing much happened after that. So this is totally a false test.

Further, think about the assumption here. A President isn't active unless he passes some big-ass LEGACY bill with his name on it? Really? That says a lot about how they think. Style over substance. The reality is that what Trump has done has been incredibly active so far and he's done it without even needing signature legislation.

● Trump Opens Death Camps for Jews!!: The MSM is trying to swing Jews back to the Democrats. To do this, they've run with some interesting twists. First, they wrote suspicion/smear articles in which they noted that Trump might now like Jews. As proof, they pointed out that his own daughter had converted and he might not like that. No evidence was offered. They jumped all over the Holocaust statement because it didn't use the specific words they wanted. They ignored his friends and business partners who are Jews. They ignored his support of Israel. Now they are linking his election to 11 Jewish centers getting bomb threats. What? According to the ADL, all Jewish centers get bomb threats every day, so why is this new? Not to mention, there was no mention of Trump, nor have Trump's supporters ever been linked to antisemitism. Talk about inventing a smear out of whole cloth!

● Trump Opens Death Camps for Trannies!!: Oh oh. Trump called the transgender bathroom issue a state's rights issue and he reversed Obama's brave bathroom executive order which came somewhere near the very end of Obama's term in office (why does that sentence sound dirty?). The end result will be that... well, nothing changes. Yep. Nothing's going to change. Yet, he is being roundly denounced as if he were a child rapist. Maybe they should stage a million Trannie march... oops, there aren't that many. How about a 200,000 Trannie March! They can wear reversible Dick Head/Pussy Hats.

● Crazy Train: The MSM is pulling out all the stops again. Now they are digging up "historians" to say he will be impeached or might start a civil war, shrinks to claim he has "cabin fever" and other mental disorders, and a never-ending parade of experts to tell us how everything he's doing suggests buggery.

● Among the Apes: There are suddenly a ton of articles written by idiots that start with "I'm a (silicon valley/college/union) liberal and I decided to go meet some actual Trump supports and find out what the hell they are thinking." These articles read a lot like mental masturbation as the authors invariably struggle to prove their own superiority over the natives. It's becoming an epidemic and it's stupid. Frankly, I think we should fire back and send scientists to live among the liberals and analyze their world. That could be pretty funny. "After breaking up Oreo cookie, subject spent ten minutes worrying about effect of segregation of black and white parts. Eventually used the N-word and tossed both parts in the gluten-free garbage can."

● Irony: Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic that the left is upset that Trump might be weak on the Russia issue when they spent the whole Cold War essentially acting as a Soviet fifth column?

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Good News Break...

Sometimes you just need some positive news to escape the crazy swirling all around. Normally, I would post photos of cute puppies, kittens, and piglets. Instead, here is something from UpWorthy and created by Chris Austin Hadfield, a retired Canadian astronaut who was the first Canadian to walk in space.

Okay, back to crazy...

Well, maybe just one puppy/pig/kitten...

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Quick Thoughts

Hi folks. I'm barely back to the living and don't have a ton of energy. So I'm just going to share a couple quick thoughts tonight.

● The Milo thing doesn't interest me much except for this: the right has been saying for decades that gays and underage sex are linked in the left's agenda. The left has angrily denounced that, all the while partnering with groups advocating the lowering of the age of consent to the low teens or eliminating it entirely. Gay literature is packed with stories about gay men molesting young boys. Etc. So now Milo comes close to saying he's into young boys and the left loses its mind. Interesting. Now, I know the left is only pretending to be outraged just to get Milo, but don't be surprised the next time some gay leftist gets caught in bed with a teen age boy, if the left decides that sex with teens is a human right... unless it's done by someone they don't like.

● Matt Damon's yellow-face film about the white guy who goes to save China from dragons bombed. Ha ha.

● Mike Flynn is gone. The left is now looking to have him arrested and sentenced to death and then use their pogrom as a basis for getting Trump impeached. Ok, good luck with that. I see no evidence that anyone who doesn't already hate Trump cares. The thing just isn't mentioned outside of wonk journals. To the public this scandal is "he talked to the Russians... something that lots of people do... then he lied to Pence and got fired for lying." No big deal. The new guy sounds pretty good. And for those keeping score, Trump's team has slapped the Russians about a dozen times already, giving them nothing they've wanted.

● Speaking of the public versus the insiders, the Post had an interesting article today where they actually spoke to real Trump supporters. They were shocked to find that these people consider him a stunning success so far and they consider the negative to be media noise. I don't think that's going to change. The funny part about the article is how they turn their own beliefs into facts and then smear the Trump people for not accepting their facts. A good example was the mention of an executive order Trump signed killing Obama regulations that would have banned the dumping of certain coal by-products in rivers starting this month. That would have cost 70,000 jobs. Well, apparently, the stupid Trump people were too biased to understand that leftist economists said the regulations actually could have created more jobs than that. Really? How? By handing out unemployment slips? This goes right to the heart of the matter though. The left/media invents "fake news" they want to believe and then they smear the public for not accepting their made up views as truth.

● Evidence that the left is running out of energy came this weekend when the "Not My President" rallies didn't make much news. Did you even hear about them? Even Trump's rally in Florida was only protested by a couple hundred people and only a few in pussyhats.

● Some perspective. 203 million Americans watched at least one NFL game season. 130 million voted. 37 million watched the Presidential debates. 2.3 million turned out for the pussyhead rally... assuming you believe the fake news numbers. What does the public really care about?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Presidents Day Chat

Okay, it's Presidents Day, the day we remember what exactly? Oh, yeah, to remember all of those men (for now, anyway) who have been elected by the States to be the Chief Executive executing our laws enacted by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court in this country in the good times and the bad times and every day inbetween.

George Washington said that he intended to return to his farm in Virginia rather than establish himself as a lord in a new dominion, King George III declared that "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world". Though Washington did not immediatedly return to his farm, he did after grudgingly being our 1st President and establishing the tradition of no more than 2 terms/8 years in office.

Interesting that we do not give much credit to our 2nd President John Adams who executed the first peaceful transfer of power in Western history that did not include the death, dismemberment, or exile of the outgoing ruler. He established this tradition that has been followed through 43 successive administrations even through Civil War.

Comments are welcomed.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

So This Happened In NYC

The actor, thinker and arteest that is Shia LeBoef somehow talked the Museum of the Moving Image in Queens, NYC to allow him to set up an performance aahht installation (and presumable fund with taxpayer dollars) in the last few weeks called "He Will Not Divide Us", a political protest performanc aahht piece. Yeah, he just can't cope with President Trump, so he set up a live 24/7 video feed in a parking lot outside the museum that was supposed to run for the next 4 years where the public was invited to participate by yelling the phrase, "He will not divide us," into the camera....blah, blah, blah.

Of course, the first thing that happened was the Mr. LeBeouf was arrested and charged with misdemeanor assault for pummeling someone who disagreed with his aahhtistic vision. But after that, it has gone smoothly without incident. Okay, that was a joke, of COURSE it didn't go smoothly! And not because of any Trumpsters. Actually the neighbors started complaining about the noise and nuisance of the rabble. Because of the security risk, the police had to be stationed outside the installation to patrol 24/7...at the taxpayers expense.

After less than a week, the Museum Board decided to shut the project down because the installation had become an "ongoing public safety hazard for the Museum, its visitors, staff, local residents, and businesses." LeBoeuf was very disappointed:

And then there was something about milk now being recognized as another example of white privilege because of something about lactose intolerance in non-Western cultures or something.

Comments? Oh, please, PLEASE change the subject.

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: IT'S VALENTINE'S DAY. Plan accordingly with hearts, flowers, candy, and the like. Don't say you weren't warned!

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

A Liberal Tea Party?

There are a lot of article recently being written about this "liberal Tea Party" forming up all of a sudden. These articles are strategizing and planning and gushing about the possibilities. But there's a... the people they are expecting to be there have already moved on.

Here's the fantasy: The US is full of leftist voters who just don't turn out like those meanie Republicans. In 2009, racist whites turned out because they were upset by Obama. Trump is much worse than Obama, so billions of Americans are turning out to stop him. Why, just look at the Womyn's March which brought out three million women to stop Trump. Those women and others want to form a liberal Tea Party, they all said so. And Chuck Schumer walked through the crowd and he estimates that 20% of those chickies didn't even vote in the election!! That means billions of potential new liberal voters just waiting to turn out. There are other groups too, being brought out by groups who can act like liberal versions of the Koch brothers (who created the Tea Party). These are groups like Planned Parenthood and other progressive groups. The only thing we need to worry about is keeping them from turning against the Democrats like the Tea Party did with the Republicans.

Oh boy.

Some reality...

1. The Tea Party was an organic movement of working (mainly) whites who had been sh*t upon for decades and turned out for a specific purpose. These were selfless people with a work ethic and organization skills, and felt their lives were being ruined by the government's abuses. By comparison, leftists -- be they Pussyheads or OWS or student rioters or Seattle anarchists or BLM or whatnot -- are selfish lazy whiners who are consumed by their wants, formed into exclusive racial/gender tribes, and want to impose their will upon others. One of these things is not like the other. One forms an effective unit, the other becomes all rapey, pollutey, and violent tantrumy.

2. The idea that the Koch's created or maintained the Tea Party is a liberal fantasy. Trying to build in that model won't work. Building with that model creates the modern progressive left... astroturf, not a Tea Party movement. All the people likely to engage in that model are already engaged.

3. The Womyn's March was not 3 million women. That's propaganda, and it's delusional to believe your own propaganda. The real number was probably closer to 500,000 nationwide. That's 0.3% of the number voters in 2016. If all of them were new voters, they still would not have changed the election. Twenty percent of them (the supposed "new voters") represent just 0.06% of voters. That's barely margin of error stuff, and definitely wouldn't have changed the election. What's more, the idea that even 20% of them didn't vote is ridiculous. Those crowds were wall to wall turned-out leftists, they were not some silent majority brought to action. Said differently... there aren't very many of these people and the voters the Democrats are hoping to find don't exist.

4. The Womyn's March is already dead and gone. It's not forming. It's not building behind the scenes. It's dead. How do I know? Two things. First, there has been no evidence at all of them continuing after their weekend fun. This is a bunch of people promising to get together more often from now on when they are drunk at a party... they never follow through. There are no local meetings, no buzz. Even the Townhalls being filled with leftists right now are all just astroturf turning up for an hour or two -- several progressive groups are actually bragging about sending their people to disrupt these meetings.

Secondly, as I said before, look at the mindset of the pussyheads. These are people who have deluded themselves into thinking that "raising awareness" is the equivalent of solving a problem, and it doesn't even bother them that there is already 100% awareness on the issues they are "solving." These are the people who think snarky online comments, SNL routines, and leaving nasty reviews at Nordstroms is "political action." These aren't achievers. They are people whose ideology is that their personal problems are the result of people discriminating against them and they want to feel better: Accept Me!! Stop shaming me!! Stop making me feel bad about myself!! Stop having more than I do!! Stop making me pay for my own mistakes!! Those aren't people who can coordinate to form a movement, or get along for the good of the group, or even find a common purpose.

The idea of a liberal Tea Party is fantasy.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Of Hypocrites, Liars and Patriots

Some thoughts on a few things I've run across lately...

● Trump didn't cancel the sending of US M1-Abrams tanks to Lithuania. This started under Obama and Trump is continuing with it. They will be part of four battalions of troops based there to keep the Russians out. This will wildly disappoint the never-Trumps who desperately want Trump to be a Russian agent. Send them some flowers or something.

● Check out this photo:

This is meant to "celebrate diversity" by showing how different women can all be beautiful. Really? Ok. Allow me to respond. Men have long know that when it comes to beauty, variety is the spice of life. And study after study has shown that men as a group are more attracted to average women than they are to the anorexic-model-thing women's magazines assure us are the only model of beauty. In fact, it's only women who seem to think these stick-figure zombies are the ideal of beauty. What's more, take another look at that picture. Are they celebrating diversity or cloning? You tell me. Maybe it was meant as irony?

● If you want a totally not-self-aware statement, actress America Ferrer said this: "I love looking beautiful, but it's only a small piece of me." LOL! Uh, yeah. This bit of narcissism really isn't uncommon in Hollywood anymore, but it's still hard for average people to swallow. So Hollywood has invented the narcissism shield. If you are a bitch or flaunt your hotness, you just need to claim that you were bullied as a child. Do that an all is forgiven because once you've been blessed with the touch of bully-victimhood, you can be the biggest motherf*cker in the world and you are still the victim. And if you go too far, just add a sexual-abused codecil to the story of your childhood. Then you are untouchable.

As for America, for the record baby, you have a stupid name and you're mannish. Now you've been bullied. You can thank me later.

● The Patriots had their classy victory rally in Boston. Most wore their wife-beaters, except for those who went shirtless and poured booze all over their chests. Hope you brought your air guitars! Boston is a special place. I wonder if they let the "darkies" come to this rally?

● To show you how pathetic the left has become, the latest revolutionary/resistance tactic against Trump has been to say something "cutting" about him on twitter. Oooh, go girl! That's really, uh... worthless. Lenin must be spinning in his grave. Speaking of which, what happened to the Women's Rally? That kind of fizzled, didn't it?

● Finally a group of wounded veterans has put together an ad begging us not to kill Obamacare because without it, they wouldn't get treatment. Liars. If they are wounded in their military duties, they get care through the military, not Obamacare.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

No, Lady Liberty Was Not Originally A Muslim Woman

As if things couldn't get more strange, CBS News' big scoop of the weekend was that "researchers" have discovered that the Statue Of Liberty, was really supposed to be a Muslim peasant women first. Well, okay, but not really. The story that CBS was trying to twist is that French sculptor Frédéric-Auguste Bartholdi had at one time pitched the idea of a massive, draped sculpture holding a torch that would act as a lighthouse as the entrance to the Suez Canal. The Egyptians had just spent a fortune building the Suez Canal and politely declined. They opted to built a lighthouse instead. CBS's report

Not being deterred from making a giant statue for someone, Bartholdi then tried to sell his giant statue idea to the US, as it was coming up to the Centennial celebrations of our great nation. I believe this is how the conversation may have gone when Bartholdi came to the US with his sketches of very large scuptures:

Bartholdi: "Bonjour, US people, have I got something that you need. Wait, let me get my sketches. Non, not that one [tosses Suez Canal sketch in the fire] Oh, here it is! Just what you need for your Centennial, don't you think? I call it "Large Woman In Roman/Greco Garb Holding A Lamp". Not bad, oui?

US: "Wow, cool, we'd love it! But first we're gonna have to find a place to put it. Oh, wait, let's build a fake island in the middle of NY harbor. Hey, Freddie, would you call it “Liberty Enlightening the World” 'cause we need to seem more "welcoming". Do you think you can convince our pals the French to kick a few bucks and "gift" it to us? I mean, it IS our Centennial and they helped a little. Ooh, maybe we should add some inspiring words to go on it. Do I hear "poetry contest"???

Bartholdi: Voila! Great name, by the way."Liberty Enlightening the World". Au revoir, US, I will see what I can do!"

Okay, maybe that's not exactly what transpired in that meeting, but I seriously doubt that Bartholdi was trying to sell a statue of a Muslim peasant woman to the US. He was trying to sell a statue...to anyone who would buy one.

Fun fact: Gustave Eiffel, the man who engineered the Eiffel Tower also build the internal structure for the Statue of Liberty.

Oh, and if not to be outdone, an "historian" has also said that the model for the Statue of Liberty was actually a man.HuffPo - Is The Statue Of Liberty A Man?
Any thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Quick Thoughts

Now that the Super Bowl is over, here are a couple quick thoughts.

● First, f*&% you Patriots. Your win was @#*&$^ #$@!% bull$%$@ #$^@#$$ and also #$^%%# well-deserved #@#$%%@ #$%@@#$ choke on a #@$%. In all seriousness, congratulations to Boston, the whiniest, most racist city in America. May you all drink yourselves into a stupor tonight and wake up in a gutter in Lowell. You've earned it... Massholes.

● California has been talking about leaving the union or not paying their taxes. They've been working under the assumption that California only gets $0.78 back on every dollar it sends to Washington. Well, it turns out that's not true. A new study by the state itself found that they get back $0.99. What's more this study fails to account for the housing deduction and the deduction for state income tax. With those, I suspect California gets way more than it pays. Personally, I think we should test it. Let's push California out and see what happens.

● This weekend's Trump outrages have fallen to the level of voodoo with body language experts telling us that Trump has issues based on where he places his hands and legs, and we had a shrink declare him unstable and trending toward crazy. It's sad when it comes to this kind of idiotic smear. But that's where they've ended up. Why? Well, it's quickly turning out that all the stories they've been telling aren't true. Indeed:

● Australia continues to deny the phone call. As does Mexico. BTW, the AP and CNN not only report different tones in the conversation, with the AP calling the supposedly offending language "lighthearted", but they reported different words being used despite supposedly both using the same "transcript." CNN later reported that rather than threatening to send the military to do what Mexico won't, Trump offered to send our military to help. Slight difference there... 'want help?' v. 'I might invade your ass!'

● The talk that Trump was lifting sanction on the Russian intelligence service was false. It turns out this was a technical fix planned by Obama and executed now.

● Do you remember how Trump issued the immigration Executive Order without the knowledge or input of Homeland Security and Justice? Well, Homeland Security denies this and said they knew about it. And a memo CNN got their hands on shows that Justice approved the Executive Order. So much for the whole smear.

● Wait, there's more! Remember how Steven Bannon went to Homeland Security behind Trump's back to convince them to apply the order to green cards? Never happened. Everyone denies it and visitor logs prove it. And the same reporter who started this (Josh Rogin from WashPo) also created the story about the "entire leadership team at the State Department quitting" when those people were but six of dozens and they had resigned before Trump took office. A simple look at State's Organizational chart would have disproved the story to Rogin.

● There was a story about Trump firing Secret Service people. That never happened either.

● Oh, and that "conservative, Bush-appointee" who struck down Trump's executive order also told the cops in a recent hearing that "black lives matter." Hmm.

● Some people are threatening to boycott Budweiser for their Super Bowl ad in which they traced the path of their founder, an immigrant from Germany. I saw the ad and thought it was in the best of American traditions, honoring the very kinds of people who built America and established the American dream. Boycotting this is idiotic.

That said, 84 Lumber just shot themselves in the pantalones. 84 Lumber is an East Coast version of Home Depot, kind of. Their customer base is white guys with plumber's crack. Yet, they paid for a Super Bowl ad that featured a little Mexican girl and her mother who brave the elements to sneak across deserts and harsh landscapes filled with predators to make it to the US. That's right, their ad glorifies illegal immigrants from Mexico... the same people taking the jobs from the white guys with plumber's crack. Stupid.

● Finally, there was an interesting article about polls this weekend. It said that three polls that use robot calls and fair questions put Trump's approval ratings at a positive, with most having him between 51-55% pro and 46% con. That's consistent with historical precedent, so I suspect that's true. The polls that have him at 40% support and 50% opposition, on the other hand, are using extensive interviews and are oversampling Democrats by a wide margin. Imagine that. Anyways, the point to the article was a worry that maybe "we" (good leftists) are underestimating his popularity and need to rethinking if being whiny b*tches is a good strategy. That's actually insightful. I hope they don't listen.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Groundhog's Day Open Thread

This is a very special day. It is the day that our beloved Pennsylvania cousins coax Punxsutawney Phil, the US Weather-Laureate and groundhog, from his/her burrow to predict exactly how much longer winter will last.

While we're waiting with great anticipation to know what Phil will predict, just talk about anything - the riots at Berkley, pending Supreme Court Nominee grilling from the Senate, or anything you like. Just keep it civil because Punxsutawney Phil needs to concentrate..

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Neil Gorsuch

So Trump nominated 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Neil Gorsuch. I’m not in love with the choice, but most conservatives will be.

Here’s what we know about Judge Neil M. Gorsuch:

Great qualifications.

• Harvard Law School, 1991
• Law clerk, Supreme Court Justice Byron R. White/associate attorney general
• Nominated by George W. Bush, 2006, to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
• From 1995–2005, Gorsuch was a lawyer at the Washington, D.C. law firm of Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel

His decisions are this:

• Opposed to class action suits. That’s good. Class actions suits are an abomination that let lawyers use injured people to rob companies. No one benefits but the lawyers. The left will hate this.

• Ruled that religious employers cannot be forced to provide contraceptive insurance. This was the same thing the Supremes would say later. The left hates this. He also said that governments can display religious materials without needing to display the materials of all competing religions. Liberals will hate that too. But in so saying, he pointed out that the law doesn’t protect popular beliefs, it protects unpopular beliefs. I suspect this means he will protect the rights of minority religions equally. This is how it should be, but it will frustrate the Religious Right, who don’t like the government also promoting Islam.

• Favors capital punishment. Not controversial.

• He’s never ruled on abortion, but he’s VERY opposed to euthanasia, which suggests he’ll be pro-life. How he goes on this will be hard to tell. He’s a “strict constructionist,” but that doesn’t actually suggest a position because abortion is a new issue... it was not part of the Constitution when written. Conservatives often claim to respect precedent. But when it comes to Roe v. Wade, they often go apesh*t on the precedent issue. I suspect he will go with his political views and be pro-life, but who knows.

• No idea what he will say on gays. I think that issue is settled though.

• He’s very pro-big business. I don’t like that.

• He doesn’t support a wide open Commerce Clause. That means he would have voted against Obamacare and may be opposed to the war on drugs. This is generally a good position for those who favor smaller government. I see that as a red herring.

His most interesting opinion to me, is a case called Guitierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch. Do you remember me talking about the way to shrink the federal government is to take away the ability of Congress to pass vague laws and let the Executive essentially fill them in? In Guitierrez-Brizuela, he talked about reconsidering the court’s 1984 Chevron case which gave federal agencies the authority to interpret ambiguous laws rather than striking them down and sending them back to the Congress. That's the case I was talking about, or at least the final nail in the small government coffin. Changing that would be a great change, and the fact he recognizes that makes him interesting.

Ultimately, I don’t think Gorsuch changes anything though. He is a safe choice who was approved by the Democrats in the Senate under Bush (though they will block him now), and he replaces Scalia and should rule about the same. The next justice will be more interesting. Trump definitely picked a solid candidate to make the GOP establishment happy. This was no rogue pick. I don't think the public will care either way. I am disappointed Trump didn't pick a woman to defuse the "he hates women" stuff. We'll see.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...